Res 709 Research Conceptualization and Design

Research Paradigms

Res 709: Research Conceptualization and Design

Research Paradigms

Research paradigms offer insights for a researcher in research approach and in determining research methods for a study. It is essential for a researcher to understand how each paradigm affects the outcomes of the study. The paradigms give a set of assumptions; providing a theoretical foundation, to help the researcher conceptualized the functionality of things. It helps clarify the types of research methods require to collect data. There are four types of research paradigms that a researcher can select. The paradigms are positivism, interpretivism, critical, and pragmatic. Each paradigm offers their sets of values to the study. The paper will define the different types of paradigm and identify the similarities and differences in the research approach and methods.

Research Methods

In research, one will encounter a qualitative, quantitative, or mixed research methods study. Regardless of which paradigms the researcher choose in a study, they all share the same goal of examination. Morgan (2014) states “quantitative methods focus on the strict quantification of observations and careful control of empirical values” (p. 128). In a quantitative approach, the study focus on a large sample size and the analysis looks at the cause and effects between the variables. The qualitative method concentrates on the observation of its participants. A qualitative method provides in-depth and rich interpretation to the study. A mixed research method incorporates both methods to define the study, limit bias, and ambiguity better. Raines (2013) states “the paradigm needs to be consistent with the interest and focus of the study” (p. 425). Therefore researchers will have to select the paradigm that works with the research methods.

Positivist (Positivism) Paradigm

Elshafie (2013) states “Each research paradigm has its own ontological and epistemological assumptions that influence its methodology and method used” (p. 5). The positivist paradigm adopts a deductive approach (Dudovskiy, 2016). It focuses on discovering the truth. It focuses on factual information only obtained by observing. It uses a quantitative method and is displayed using statistics. According to Elshafie (2013), the positivist approach looks at the patterns associated with the cause and effects in the social world. The quality criteria used to judge the positivist research are internal validity, external validity, reliability, and objectivity (Elshafie, 2013, p. 6).

Interpretivist (Interpretivism) Paradigm

The interpretivist paradigm extends from a positivist paradigm. It looks at the situation in a complex way because interpretivist believed that there are more factors associated with the variables. Similar to positivist, interpretivist share the belief of knowing and reality through relativist ontology and transactional or subjectivist epistemology (Cohen and Crabtree, 2006). The interpretivist paradigm focused on qualitative data. It focuses on ethical and substantive validity. Cohen and Crabtree (2006) stated: “interpretivist positions are founded on the theoretical belief that reality is socially constructed and fluid; thus, what we know is always negotiated within cultures, social settings, and relationship with other people” (para. 2).

Critical (Critical Theory) Paradigm

Ponterotto (2005) mentioned that the critical theory aims to challenge the status quo. The critical paradigm is more theoretical than other paradigms. A “critical theorists believed the perpetuation of the subjective-objective controversy is problematic” (Cohen and Crabtree, 2006, p. 4). It focuses on case studies and social change. In a critical paradigm, the ontology approach states “the researchers assumes that socially contrived realities exist” (University of Phoenix, 2016). It uses a qualitative research design. When researchers use the critical paradigm, the researcher looks to discuss the implications and meaning of developed concepts (Cohen and Crabtree, 2006). The critical theory is “primarily idiographic and emic” (Ponterotto, 2005, p. 130).

Pragmatic (Pragmatism) Paradigm

The pragmatic paradigm incorporates qualitative and quantitative research methods; hence is a mixed method. It looks at current problems and its current solutions; hence, offers an intervention approach to the study. A pragmatist would evaluate both the problem and solutions to develop a more effective way of dealing with the problem. It attempts to gain a better understanding of the issues as well. While a pragmatic paradigm gain advantage in the research method data collection, it still has some limitations. For a beginner researcher, it may make it difficult to collect the data because of its wide variety. The researcher would have to know what the objective of the research is.

To conclude, it is vital to understand each paradigm as it helps the researcher to decide proper research methods and designs. While each paradigm differs in approach, they all share the same commonality of address an issue and understanding the current situation. It all aims to explain attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions. Paradigms are just assumptions and help the research to understand where to start in his or her research.

References

Cohen, D., Crabtree, B. (2006). Qualitative research guidelines project. Retrieved from http://www.qualres.org/HomeInte-3516.html

Dudovskiy, J. (2016). Positivism research philosophy. Retrieved from http://research methodology.net/research-philosophy/positivism/

Elshafie, M. (2013). Research Paradigms: The Novice Researcher’s Nightmare. Arab World English Journal, 4(2), 4-13.

Ferguson, D. L. (1993). Something a little out of the ordinary: Reflections on becoming an interpretivist researcher. Remedial & Special Education,14(4), 35.

Morgan, D. L. (2014). Pragmatism as a paradigm for social research. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(8), 1045-1053.

Ponterotto, J. G. (2005). Qualitative research in counseling psychology: A primer on research paradigms and philosophy of science. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 126-136.

Raines, D. A. (2013). Research paradigms and methods. Neonatal Network, 32(6), 425-428.

The University of Phoenix. (2016). Res/709: the foundation of social research video. University of Phoenix